User talk:Dr Frank: Difference between revisions
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
This really is a minor issue (pun somewhat intended), but I noticed that you were designating almost all of your [[Special:Contributions/The Second|The Second edits]] from the last few weeks as [[Help:Minor Edits|minor edits]]. As that help article mentions, it's left up to the editor to determine whether to designate an edit as a minor edit, but as it also points out, it's commonly understood that minor edits do not introduce new content, as many of your edits do. It would be helpful if you could mark your edits based on the guidelines outlined in the article, since being able to have a common expectation for the designation of minor edits makes things (such as reviewing recent changes or a watchlist) much easier. Thanks! --[[User:Aichon|Aichon]] 09:20, 20 September 2009 (BST) | This really is a minor issue (pun somewhat intended), but I noticed that you were designating almost all of your [[Special:Contributions/The Second|The Second edits]] from the last few weeks as [[Help:Minor Edits|minor edits]]. As that help article mentions, it's left up to the editor to determine whether to designate an edit as a minor edit, but as it also points out, it's commonly understood that minor edits do not introduce new content, as many of your edits do. It would be helpful if you could mark your edits based on the guidelines outlined in the article, since being able to have a common expectation for the designation of minor edits makes things (such as reviewing recent changes or a watchlist) much easier. Thanks! --[[User:Aichon|Aichon]] 09:20, 20 September 2009 (BST) | ||
:Yep, it's admittedly a bit odd, but it's the convention everyone uses. Pretty much anything more than a typo correction is considered to be a non-minor update, with minor updates only being used for correcting typos, fixing links, etc. in regular use. If you're having to type in a sentence or two, it's almost never a minor edit. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 14:41, 23 September 2009 (BST) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:41, 23 September 2009
| The Discussion Page! |
| You discuss things here. |
Important!
Please use the + sign above to start a new discussion. New discussion to be started below the existing ones. Thank you.
Untitled
I'm back, more or less. I'm logging in with this account but still using User:Dr Frank. Do not meddle with the other account, and for all matters of practical sensibility communicate with me right here! Have fun. --~Dr Frank (t) (DF) [P] (Sb) 08:45, 31 August 2009 (BST)
Okay your whole 2 account thing is really weird and i don't like it...things like this create a lot of confusion. Would you mind signing it with User:The Second or perhaps logging onto Dr Frank rather than having the other user place the vote with this users sig, super dodgy...--xoxo 05:58, 14 September 2009 (BST)
- His username redirects and his signature goes to the same page as well... what's the confusion? --Bob Boberton TF / DW
06:15, 14 September 2009 (BST)
- Confusion is the page history says a user called The Second edited and there is no link to such a user, i have to come here to find out what is going on. You can't vote from one account under a different name unless it links to that users page. He could have [[User:The Second|Dr Frank]] with User:The Second redirecting back to Dr Frank so when i scroll over i can see what is going on.--xoxo 06:25, 14 September 2009 (BST)
Okay dude you're breaking the signature policy, change your sig please.--xoxo 06:26, 14 September 2009 (BST)
Er, I'm not sure. I meant to cancel my vote and sort this mess out when I had some more time but Yonnua makes my vote legit on that page. I did sort out that trouble previously I believe. Let me know if there's some problem. ~Dr Frank (t) (DF) [P] (Sb) 18:32, 14 September 2009 (BST)
Updating the news
Thank you for helping in updating the suburb news with External Military reports. However, when you update it, please use Malton time (the server time, GMT/UTC/BST, i.e. time of England) instead of your local time. All of your updates today was marked as September 20th even though your signature clearly stated it was September 19th. I know this is trivial, but let's keep thing consistent. Thank you. -- Kittithaj 23:46, 19 September 2009 (BST)
- Confusion I can understand, but accusations and arguments over changing of dates? Assume good faith would help a lot in this situation. Anyway, thank you for helping in contribution. -- Kittithaj 03:04, 21 September 2009 (BST)
Minor edits
This really is a minor issue (pun somewhat intended), but I noticed that you were designating almost all of your The Second edits from the last few weeks as minor edits. As that help article mentions, it's left up to the editor to determine whether to designate an edit as a minor edit, but as it also points out, it's commonly understood that minor edits do not introduce new content, as many of your edits do. It would be helpful if you could mark your edits based on the guidelines outlined in the article, since being able to have a common expectation for the designation of minor edits makes things (such as reviewing recent changes or a watchlist) much easier. Thanks! --Aichon 09:20, 20 September 2009 (BST)
- Yep, it's admittedly a bit odd, but it's the convention everyone uses. Pretty much anything more than a typo correction is considered to be a non-minor update, with minor updates only being used for correcting typos, fixing links, etc. in regular use. If you're having to type in a sentence or two, it's almost never a minor edit. —Aichon— 14:41, 23 September 2009 (BST)
